Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Introduction
Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) is a developing composite material that
will allow the concrete industry to optimize material use, generate
economic benefits, and build structures that are strong, durable, and
sensitive to environment. A comparison of the physical, mechanical, and
durability properties of RPC and HPC (High Performance Concrete)
shows that RPC possesses better strength (both compressive and flexural)
and lower permeability compared to HPC. This page reviews the
available literature on RPC, and also presents the results of laboratory
investigations comparing RPC with HPC. Specific benefits and potential
applications of RPC have also been described.
High-Performance Concrete (HPC) is not just a simple mixture of
cement, water, and aggregates. It contains mineral components and
chemical admixtures having very specific characteristics, which give
specific properties to the concrete. The development of HPC results from
the materialization of a new science of concrete, a new science of
admixtures and the use of advanced scientific equipments to monitor
concrete microstructure.
HPC has achieved the maximum compressive strength in its existing
form of microstructure. However, at such a level of strength, the coarse
aggregate becomes the weakest link in concrete. In order to increase the
compressive strength of concrete even further, the only way is to remove
the coarse aggregate. This philosophy has been employed in Reactive
Powder Concrete (RPC)1.
Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) was developed in France in the early
1990s and the worlds first Reactive Powder Concrete structure, the
Sherbrooke Bridge in Canada, was erected in July 1997. Reactive Powder
Concrete (RPC) is an ultra high-strength and high ductility cementitious
composite with advanced mechanical and physical properties. It consists
of a special concrete where the microstructure is optimized by precise
gradation of all particles in the mix to yield maximum density. It uses
extensively the pozzolanic properties of highly refined silica fume and
optimization of the Portland cement chemistry to produce the highest
strength hydrates1.
The concept of reactive powder concrete was first developed by P.
Richard and M. Cheyrezy and RPC was first produced in the early 1990s
by researchers at Bouygues laboratory in France2. A field application of
RPC was done on the Pedestrian/Bikeway Bridge in the city of
Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada3. RPC was nominated for the 1999 Nova
Awards from the Construction Innovation Forum. RPC has been used
successfully for isolation and containment of nuclear wastes in Europe
due to its excellent impermeability4.
The requirements for HPC used for the nuclear waste containment
structures of Indian Nuclear Power Plants are normal compressive
strength, moderate E value, uniform density, good workability, and high
durability5. There is a need to evaluate RPC regarding its strength and
durability to suggest its use for nuclear waste containment structures in
Indian context.
Composition of Reactive Powder Concrete
RPC is composed of very fine powders (cement, sand, quartz powder and
silica fume), steel fibres (optional) and superplasticizer. The
superplasticizer, used at its optimal dosage, decreases the water to
cement ratio (w/c) while improving the workability of the concrete. A
very dense matrix is achieved by optimizing the granular packing of the
dry fine powders. This compactness gives RPC ultra-high strength and
durability6. Reactive Powder Concretes have compressive strengths
ranging from 200 MPa to 800 MPa.
Richard and Cheyrezy1 indicate the following principles for developing
RPC:
1. Elimination of coarse aggregates for enhancement of homogeneity
2. Utilization of the pozzolanic properties of silica fume
3. Optimization of the granular mixture for the enhancement of
compacted density
4. The optimal usage of superplasticizer to reduce w/c and improve
workability
5. Application of pressure (before and during setting) to improve
compaction
6. Post-set heat-treatment for the enhancement of the microstructure
7. Addition of small-sized steel fibres to improve ductility
Table 1 lists salient properties of RPC, along with suggestions on how to
achieve them. Table 2 describes the different ingredients of RPC and
their selection parameters. The mixture design of RPC primarily involves
the creation of a dense granular skeleton. Optimization of the granular
mixture can be achieved either by the use of packing models7 or by
particle size distribution software, such as LISA8 [developed by Elkem
ASA Materials]. For RPC mixture design an experimental method has
been preferred thus far. Table 3 presents various mixture proportions for
RPC obtained from available literature1,3,9,10.
Types of
failure
eliminated
Mechanical,
Chemical &
Thermomechanical
Disturbance
of the
mechanical
stress field.
By any
external
source (e.g.,
formwork).
reactivity
to
during 25 m
heattreating
Filling the
voids,
Procured
Enhance
from
Very less
0.1 m
rheology,
Ferrosilicon
Silica fume
quantity of
to
Production
industry
impurities
1 m
of
(highly
secondary
refined)
hydrates
L : 13
25 mm
Good aspect Improve
Steel fibres
:
Straight
ratio
ductility
0.15
0.2 mm
Less
Reduce
Polyacrylate
Superplasticizer retarding
_
w/c
based
characteristic
Table 3: RPC mixture designs from literature
P. Richard and M.
S. A.
V.
S.
1
3
9
Cheyrezy
Bouygues Matte Staquet10
[1995]
[1997] [1999] [2000]
Non
12 mm
25 mm
Fibred Fibred
fibred
fibres
fibres
Portland
1
1
1
1
Cement
Silica fume 0.25 0.23 0.25 0.23
Sand
1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1
Quartz Powder -- 0.39 -- 0.39
Superplasticizer 0.016 0.019 0.016 0.019
Steel fibre
--- 0.175 0.175
Water
0.15 0.17 0.17 0.19
Compacting
----pressure
Heat treatment
20C 90C 20C 90C
temperature
0.324
1.423
0.296
0.027
0.268
0.282
0.325
1.43
0.3
0.018
0.275
0.2
0.324
1.43
0.3
0.021
0.218
0.23
--
--
--
90C
90C
90C
The major parameter that decides the quality of the mixture is its water
concretes12.
Table 4: Comparison of RPC 200 and RPC 800
RPC 200
None
RPC 800
Pre-setting pressurization
50 MPa
250 to
Heat-treating
20 to 90C
400C
Compressive strength (using 170 to 230 490 to 680
quartz sand)
MPa
MPa
Compressive strength (using
650 to 810
-steel aggregate)
MPa
30 to 60 45 to 141
Flexural strength
MPa
MPa
Table 5: Comparison of HPC (80 MPa) and RPC 2009
Property
Compressive strength
Flexural strength
Modulus of Elasticity
Fracture Toughness
80 MPa
7 MPa
40 GPa
<10 J/m
RPC 200
200 MPa
40 MPa
60 GPa
30*10 J/m
Limitations of RPC
In a typical RPC mixture design, the least costly components of
conventional concrete are basically eliminated or replaced by more
expensive elements. The fine sand used in RPC becomes equivalent to the
coarse aggregate of conventional concrete, the Portland cement plays the
role of the fine aggregate and the silica fume that of the cement. The
mineral component optimization alone results in a substantial increase in
cost over and above that of conventional concrete (5 to 10 times higher
than HPC). RPC should be used in areas where substantial weight
savings can be realized and where some of the remarkable characteristics
of the material can be fully utilized2. Owing to its high durability, RPC
can even replace steel in compression members where durability issues
2
3
4
Sample
Cement, OPC,
53-grade
[IS. 12269
1987]
Micro Silica
[ASTM C1240
97b]
Quartz Powder
Standard sand,
grade-1
[IS. 650 1991]
Standard sand,
grade-2
[IS. 650 1991]
Standard sand,
grade-3
[IS. 650 1991]
Specific
Gravity
3.15
31 m 7.5 m
2.2
5.3 m 1.8 m
2.7
5.3 m 1.3 m
2.65
2.36 mm 0.6 mm
2.65
0.6 mm 0.3 mm
2.65
0.5 mm 0.15 mm
10
11
7.1
length: 30 mm &
dia: 0.4 mm
7.1
length: 36 mm &
dia: 0.5 mm
2.78
25 mm 10 mm
2.78
12.5 mm 4.75
mm
2.61
2.36 mm 0.15
mm
Mixture Proportions
RPCHPCRPC
HPC
F*
F**
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.25 0.25 0.12 0.12
0.31 0.31
1.09 1.09
0.58 0.58
2.40 2.40
1.40 1.40
1.50 1.50
0.20
0.20
Cement
Silica fume
Quartz powder
Standard sand grade 2
Standard sand grade 3
River Sand
20 mm aggregate
10 mm aggregate
30 mm steel fibres
36 mm steel fibres
Admixture (Polyacrylate
0.03
based)
Water
0.25
* Fibre RPC
0.4
0.4
** Fibre HPC
Workability and density were recorded for the fresh concrete mixtures.
Some RPC specimens were heat cured by heating in a water bath at 90C
after setting until the time of testing. Specimens of RPC and HPC were
also cured in water at room temperature.
The performance of RPC and HPC was monitored over time with respect
to the following parameters:
Compressive Strength (as per IS 51613 on 5 cm cubes for RPC, 10 cm
cubes for HPC), Flexural Strength (as per IS 516 on 4 x 4 x 16 cm prisms
for RPC, 10 x 10 x 50 cm beams for HPC),
Water Absorption (on 15 cm cubes for both RPC and HPC),
Non destructive water permeability test using Germann Instruments (on
15 cm cubes for both RPC and HPC),
Resistance to Chloride ions Penetration test (on discs of diameter 10 cm
and length 5 cm as per ASTM C 120214).
Results
Fresh concrete properties
The workability of RPC mixtures (with and without fibres), measured
using the mortar flow table test as per ASTM C10915, was in the range of
120 140%. On the other hand, the workability of HPC mixtures (with
and without fibres), measured using the slump test as per ASTM C231 16,
was in the range of 120 150 mm. The density of fresh RPC and HPC
mixtures was found to be in the range of 2500 2650 kg/m3.
Compressive strength
The compressive strength analysis throughout the study shows that RPC
has higher compressive strength than HPC, as shown in Fig. 1.
Compressive strength at early ages is also very high for RPC.
Compressive strength is one of the factors linked with the durability of a
material. In the context of nuclear waste containment materials, the
compressive strength of RPC is higher than required.
RPC-F
NC* HWC**
18
22
*Normal Curing
HPC
NC*
8
HPC-F
NC*
10
Water absorption
Fig. 2 presents a comparison of water absorption of RPC and HPC. A
common trend of decrease in the water absorption with age is seen here
both for RPC and HPC. The percentage of water absorption of RPC,
however, is very low compared to that of HPC. This quality of RPC is one
among the desired properties of nuclear waste containment materials.
It can be seen from the data that water permeability decreases with age
for all mixtures. 28th day water permeability of RPC is negligible when
compared to that of HPC (almost 7 times lower). As in the case of water
absorption, the use of fibres increases the surface permeability of both
types of concrete.
RPC with
fibres
HPC
NC*
Cumulative
4
Charge
(less than
94
140 400 250 850
passed in
10)
Coulombs
ASTM
Very Very Very Very
C1202 Negligible Negligible
low low low low
classification
*Normal Curing
Summary
Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) is an emerging technology that lends a
new dimension to the term high performance concrete. It has immense
potential in construction due to its superior mechanical and durability
properties compared to conventional high performance concrete, and
could even replace steel in some applications.
The development of RPC is based on the application of some basic
principles to achieve enhanced homogeneity, very good workability, high
compaction, improved microstructure, and high ductility. RPC has an
ultra-dense microstructure, giving advantageous waterproofing and
durability characteristics. It could, therefore, be a suitable choice for
industrial and nuclear waste storage facilities.
A laboratory investigation comparing RPC and HPC led to the following
conclusions:
References
1. Richard P, and Cheyrezy M, Composition of Reactive Powder
Concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 25, No.7, (1995),
pp. 1501 1511.
2. Aitcin P.C, Cements of yesterday and today Concrete of
tomorrow, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 30, (2000), pp
1349 - 1359.
3. Blais P. Y, and Couture M, Precast, Prestressed Pedestrian
Bridge - Worlds first reactive powder concrete structure, PCI
Journal, Vol. 44, (1999), pp. 60 - 71.
4. Dauriac C, Special Concrete may give steel stiff competition,
Building with Cincrete, The Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce,
May 9, 1997.
5. Basu P.C, Performance Requirements of HPC for Indian NPP
Structures, The Indian Concrete Journal, Sep. 1999, pp. 539
546.
6. Bonneau O, Vernet C, Moranville M, and Aitcin P. C,
Characterization of the granular packing and percolation
threshold of reactive powder concrete, Cement and Concrete
Research, Vol. 30 (2000) pp. 1861 1867.
7. Goltermann P, Johansen V, and Palbol L, Packing of
Aggregates: An Alternative Tool to Determine the Optimal
Aggregate Mix, ACI Materials Journal, Sep-Oct. 1997, pp. 435
443.
8. Elkem AS website http://www.silicafume.net/
9. Matte V and Moranville M, Durability of Reactive Powder
Composites: Influence of Silica Fume on the leaching properties of
very low water/binder pastes, Cement and Concrete Composites,
21 (1999) pp. 1 - 9.
10. Staquet S, and Espion B, Influence of Cement and Silica Fume
Type on Compressive Strength of Reactive Powder Concrete, 6th
International Symposium on HPC, University of Brussels,
Belgium, (2000), pp. 1 14.
11. Bickley J. A, and Mitchell D, A State-of-the-Art Review of High
Performance Concrete Structures Built in Canada: 1990-2000,
(2001), pp. 96 102.
12. HDR Engineering Website on Reactive Powder Concrete, Last
modified Nov. 1999,
http://www.hdrinc.com/engineering/engres.htm
13. Indian Standard Designation IS 516-1959, Methods of Test for
Strength of Concrete, BIS, New Delhi, 2002.
14. ASTM Standard Designation C1202-97, Standard Test Method
for Electrical Indication of Concretes Ability to Resist Chloride
Ion Penetration, ASTM, Pennsylvania, 2001.
15. ASTM Standard Designation C109-99, Standard Test Method